Techdirt. Stories about "cci"Easily digestible tech news...https://www.techdirt.com/
en-usTechdirt. Stories about "cci"https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/td-88x31.gifhttps://www.techdirt.com/Tue, 13 Jan 2015 08:15:00 PSTHollywood Privately Acknowledges Six Strikes Program Isn't Doing Much, Guaranteeing It Will Get Much WorseKarl Bodehttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150112/06225429674/hollywood-privately-acknowledges-six-strikes-program-isnt-doing-much-guaranteeing-it-will-get-much-worse.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150112/06225429674/hollywood-privately-acknowledges-six-strikes-program-isnt-doing-much-guaranteeing-it-will-get-much-worse.shtml
While the program might seem effective in scaring little Billy straight once his parents notice their connection doesn't work, it clearly hasn't had much of a meaningful impact on piracy rates. Unsurprisingly, the entertainment industry argues this is because the measures don't go far enough; nobody tracks offenders between ISPs, absolutely nothing happens to a user that violates all six strikes (the program simply stops and no more notifications are sent) and most users can simply hide their behavior behind the use of BitTorrent proxy services.

That hasn't stopped CCI from frequently trumpeting six strikes as a smashing success, often using unreliable, contradictory evidence (when it can be bothered to show evidence at all) to support their argument that forcing ISPs into the role of content nannies is a great idea. Privately however, newly leaked MPAA documents suggest the entertainment industry isn't so sure six strikes is doing much of anything.

The leaked documents show the program isn't having quite the impact the MPAA would like, though again, unsurprisingly, the MPAA believes that's only because the program isn't big enough yet. While there's the occasional attempt to suggest that offenders change their ways after receiving notices, the document then proceeds to note the MPAA actually has no idea if people change their behavior, since it's possible they switched ISPs or are hiding their behavior via BitTorrent proxy services:

"The U.S. system is “not yet at scale” or operating with “enough education support” according to the MPAA. As a result the CAS has not made an “impact on the overall [piracy] landscape...“No current information as to the behavior of users who appear to stop P2P infringement – do not know whether [they are] migrating to other pirate systems or to lawful services,” the statement reads."

The MPAA's solution to this problem? Make Six Strikes bigger, bolder and thereby worse:

"Attainability as to existing programs boils down to whether ISPs will agree (a) to expand scale to levels that might impact overall P2P piracy, and (b) to enhance remedial measures so as to improve efficacy,” the MPAA writes."

I've spoken to execs at two large ISPs who have admitted privately they know most pirates have simply started using proxy services, but the ISPs are playing along begrudgingly. Already a bit put off by the added paperwork, few are going to be keen on an a voluntary expansion of the program. As such, look for the entertainment industry to lobby heavily to have this year's rewrite of the Communications Act include numerous new treasures aimed at ISP compliance of a plan expansion. Perhaps after that we can proceed to banning the use of VPNs and proxies entirely for the good of the nation?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>bigger and better is badhttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20150112/06225429674Thu, 29 May 2014 15:57:37 PDTData On 'Six Strikes' Suggests Little Real ImpactMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140528/16441927383/data-six-strikes-suggests-little-real-impact.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140528/16441927383/data-six-strikes-suggests-little-real-impact.shtmldon't actually work, but a failure to be effective has never stopped the legacy entertainment industry from pursuing useless policies and programs. Earlier this week, the Center for Copyright Information (CCI), which administers the Copyright Alert System (CAS), better known as the "six strikes" program, finally released some data about the program. While CCI quickly declared it a success, a quick look at the data suggests a rather dismal failure in terms of actually mitigating any behavior.

The proponents of the program insist that mere notices (i.e., "education") would lead people to suddenly stop their unauthorized usage ways, but that doesn't seem to be the case at all.

While, yes, that shows a decreasing slope, there's always going to be a decreasing slope due to the nature of time between alerts. And, really, if "education" was effective, you'd expect to see a much more massive decrease. As TorrentFreak notes:

...the repeat warning percentage of 30% is quite high, especially when one takes into account that people who received their first alert during the last month had little time to generate a second one. In addition, the detection rate is relatively low, not to mention subscribers’ use of anonymizing tools.

It appears that U.S. pirates are relatively persistent. In France, for example, only 9% of all the warned copyright infringers received two warnings, and that was after two full years. Also, only 0.029% of the French got a third strike.

While these “strikes” programs have their differences, the high number of second warnings in the U.S. stands out.

In other words, the data certainly suggests the deterrent effect of the program isn't particularly powerful. Furthermore, it appears that there's a rather significant error rate. After the 3rd and 4th alert, people can challenge the claims, and there were 47 successful challenges (out of 265 total challenges). Most of the successful challenges involved people claiming that others were using their account, but it certainly highlights the problem with these programs, when you are declared guilty first, and can then "pay" to challenge, you'd hope there wouldn't be so many "errors" in the program. Either way, given the fact that these programs really appear to have little overall impact on the end user, it's not surprising that so few challenge them in the first place.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>because-of-coursehttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20140528/16441927383Tue, 25 Feb 2014 12:09:00 PSTCCI Claims Six Strikes Working Great To Thwart Piracy, Offers Absolutely No Evidence To Support That ClaimKarl Bodehttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140225/04495526342/cci-claims-six-strikes-working-great-to-thwart-piracy-offers-absolutely-no-evidence-it-yet-again.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140225/04495526342/cci-claims-six-strikes-working-great-to-thwart-piracy-offers-absolutely-no-evidence-it-yet-again.shtml
Since launch there has been absolutely no data released on how many people have been sent warnings, how many people have proceeded through all of the layers, and no consumer feedback has been shared on their experiences with the program. ISPs refuse to talk whatsoever about the program, and we've seen absolutely no data on how effective the program's appeals systems for the falsely accused (who have to pay $35 for the honor of protesting their innocence) have been.

"A national effort to crack down on Internet piracy through a "six strikes" system is seeing success, according to the program's director...Jill Lesser, who runs the system as manager of the Center for Copyright Information, said fears about the system were misplaced..."It's a non-punitive system" that is "intended to be education-based," Lesser told The Hill in an interview...There were "early examples of positive feedback," said Lesser said, adding that she hopes more analysis will show that Internet providers sent out more first and second notices and fewer fifth and sixth notices, which would demonstrate that users stopped sharing infringing content."

Yes, your fears have been misplaced and the program is clearly working, and to prove it, the only evidence we'll offer you is -- our claim that your fears have been misplaced and the program is clearly working. While the CCI hasn't been willing to release any data, traffic headed to BitTorrent networks has either remained static or increased, and overall shared files on websites like The Pirate Bay have increased. One problem CCI will face when trying to show data (should that actually ever happen) on the program is that many BitTorrent users have simply moved toward BitTorrent proxy and VPN services in order to hide themselves from the watchful eye of their ISPs. Those users would show up as no longer being copyright infringers, when in reality they'd simply be hiding their network behavior.

It's not a stretch to imagine that whatever data gets released, it will somehow magically show that the program is not only a smashing success, but that the entertainment industry is justified in expanding it further. As it stands, nothing happens to users after the sixth strike, and nobody tracks users who move from ISP to ISP. As such, it's only a matter of time before more great ideas get introduced. How about a ban on VPNs and proxies? How about a taxpayer-funded organization that tracks offenders across ISPs? Fines for those who reach the sixth level? Our non-transparent data clearly shows that all these things are necessary. Trust us.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>hard-data-is-optionalhttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20140225/04495526342Tue, 22 Jan 2013 07:28:34 PSTSix Strikes Administrator: Loss Of Open WiFi Access At Cafes Is Acceptable Collateral DamageMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130118/15564321733/six-strikes-administrator-loss-open-wifi-access-cafes-is-acceptable-collateral-damage.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130118/15564321733/six-strikes-administrator-loss-open-wifi-access-cafes-is-acceptable-collateral-damage.shtmlcovered some of the details of various "six strikes" policies being implemented by most of the large broadband providers in the US, noting that with Verizon's, it appeared that small businesses that offered free and open WiFi could get in trouble for doing so. TorrentFreak has followed up with Jill Lesser, the executive director of the Center for Copyright Information (CCI), the organization coordinating these plans, and discovered that this impact on small businesses is not an error, and Lesser does not seem to see a problem with it, arguing that offering such open and free WiFi is a violation of the terms of service for most small businesses.

“In addition, the terms of service on such accounts do not allow them to be used to provide free WiFi or ‘hotspots’ so the hypothetical cafe owner offering public WiFi will not be subject to the CAS if they are following their terms of service.”

Similarly, she says that if it impacts small businesses or home-based businesses that use residential accounts, she doesn't see it as a problem, since those businesses shouldn't "allow" their employees to "engage in copyright theft." Of course, it's not theft, but infringement -- and it's frustrating that someone like Lesser would misrepresent these things.

That said, her cavalier attitude towards these very common scenarios, which will have real impacts on a variety of small businesses, is unfortunate and dangerous. The importance of a fully working broadband connection to small businesses todays cannot be overstated. To suggest that all of this is okay because they're not following an almost universally ignored term in the terms of service on such accounts seems to be dismissing things way too simply.

The end result of this is likely to be a lot less public and open WiFi at a time when we actually need much more open access. That may not matter to the RIAA and MPAA -- who still don't understand the importance and value of internet access -- but it matters an awful lot to the pubilc and a variety of small businesses.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>really-now?https://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20130118/15564321733Fri, 26 Oct 2012 18:33:00 PDTRIAA Apparently Forgot To Tell Six Strikes Coordinators That The 'Independent' Firm It Hired Used To Lobby For The RIAAMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121026/14581420856/riaa-apparently-forgot-to-tell-six-strikes-coordinators-that-independent-firm-it-hired-used-to-lobby-riaa.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121026/14581420856/riaa-apparently-forgot-to-tell-six-strikes-coordinators-that-independent-firm-it-hired-used-to-lobby-riaa.shtmlused to lobby for the RIAA. Apparently this bit of news took folks at CCI completely by surprise, since the RIAA failed to mention that tidbit of info. Now, CCI is apparently scrambling to make things right -- either by finding someone new, or by "opening up" the review that Stroz Friedberg does for the public to review. Either way, it's pretty incredible that the RIAA thought that no one would notice that the "impartial and independent" expert just happened to be a biased party that lobbied directly for them in the past.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>with-age,-comes-forgetfulnesshttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20121026/14581420856Fri, 13 Jul 2012 18:36:00 PDTIs The Six Strikes Plan Being Delayed Because ISPs Are Pushing Back Against Hollywood Demands?Mike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120713/14591019696/is-six-strikes-plan-being-delayed-because-isps-are-pushing-back-against-hollywood-demands.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120713/14591019696/is-six-strikes-plan-being-delayed-because-isps-are-pushing-back-against-hollywood-demands.shtmlsix strikes plan (really five strikes), after the White House pressured the ISPs to cave to Hollywood's interests. What many of us noticed, of course, is that this backroom deal left the public out of the equation, which was obvious from the fact that it actually takes away some of the public's rights -- for example, by curtailing the definition of the public domain.

Earlier this year, the RIAA said that the program would finally kick off in July. There were some rumors of delays, and then a bunch of sites (including us) got confused about the actual start date. There have been multiple reports now saying that it will actually roll out later in the fall.

Jill Lesser, Executive Director of the Center for Copyright Information, told the Daily Dot that the repeated delays were because the coalition wanted an independent review from the American Arbitration Association.

She hinted that disagreement between the ISPs or the lobbying groups might have held up the process. Responding to a question about the delay, she wrote “members are all very involved in internal planning and review of the alert system, which has been and will continue to be a collaborative process.”

Of course, there's one big thing that happened between when the agreement was made and now: the huge public reaction to SOPA. After that, the EFF rightly called for scrapping the backroom deal and starting a new negotiation that actually involved the public. That recommendation was ignored by Hollywood, of course, but the news of some internal fighting hopefully means that the ISPs are asserting themselves a bit more strongly against excessive RIAA/MPAA demands. Of course, once again, this is why it would be nicer if this debate were in public, rather than hidden behind closed doors.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>seems possiblehttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120713/14591019696Wed, 4 Apr 2012 07:34:00 PDTTime To Start Again On 'Six Strikes' And Let Internet Users Have A Seat At The TableMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120403/18234218361/time-to-start-again-six-strikes-let-internet-users-have-seat-table.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120403/18234218361/time-to-start-again-six-strikes-let-internet-users-have-seat-table.shtmlsix strikes agreement set up between the ISPs and the content companies (with a major shove from the White House) was the fact that there was no one representing the users at the table. As much as the White House has insisted that the entertainment industry alone represents "all the stakeholders," the simple fact is that copyright law is supposed to benefit the public, not the legacy industry gatekeepers.

And while it may have been the way things were done around copyright in the past, the public's reaction to SOPA should have changed that equation. No longer should decisions around copyright law that effect the public internet users be made without their input. And, yet, that's exactly what happened with the six strikes agreement. Even if the new Center for Copyright Infringement (CCI), which has been set up to run the new six strikes program, has appointed some consumer rights advocates to its powerless "advisory" board, shouldn't we go back to the drawing board and have a true, open discussion about these things that includes the users of the internet? After all, aren't they the true stakeholders here?

The folks over at the EFF are calling for a complete "reset" on the agreement, and saying that it's time to do it correctly: with internet users at the table, rather than kept out of the room. The statement notes that the advisory board is not the same as including internet users in the process:

An advisory board is just that: a group of advisors, not decisionmakers. No matter how you slice it, subscribers don't have a seat at the table now any more than they did in the earlier negotiations.

Instead, they point out that the only way this is going to be done in a way that's fair and that actually serves the true purpose of copyright law is to start again, and have the discussion done in public where the public has a true say in what happens:

So here's an idea: press reset. This collaboration has been years in the making, with the ISPs under heavy pressure from the content industries and government officials. It may be that they made the best deal they could under the circumstances, but since then the world has changed. If the ISPs decided to take this back to drawing board, we think their customers will stand with them, loudly and publicly -- but only if they also insist that their customers have voice in the process.

Indeed. This may have seemed like a crazy idea pre-SOPA blackout, but since then, the public is aware and energized on this issue -- and they want to participate in the conversation. The number one point we've heard over and over again since the January 18th blackouts is about how the public can get involved in a positive agenda around copyright. Here's a key opportunity. The big ISPs who signed on to this six strikes deal should call for a brand new discussion, one that is not done in a backroom, but is done in public, where the public can take part.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
]]>all-the-stake-holdershttps://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20120403/18234218361Mon, 2 Apr 2012 19:55:49 PDTOrganization Overseeing Six Strikes Agreement Between Labels And ISPs Includes Advisory Board To Try To Keep Tech Folks HappyMike Masnickhttps://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120402/18015918339/organization-overseeing-six-strikes-agreement-between-labels-isps-includes-advisory-board-to-try-to-keep-tech-folks-happy.shtml
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120402/18015918339/organization-overseeing-six-strikes-agreement-between-labels-isps-includes-advisory-board-to-try-to-keep-tech-folks-happy.shtmlsix strikes agreement, turning those ISPs into Hollywood's private police force, details are finally coming out about the Center for Copyright Information (CCI), the organization that the RIAA/MPAA were setting up to manage the six strikes effort. In a move that's at least slightly surprising, and shows that they realized they couldn't completely one-side this entire thing, CCI will be run by Jill Lesser. Lesser was a managing director at The Glover Park Group (a lobbying firm), but also on the board of the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), a group that is often on the correct side of these issues. That said, Glover Park was also one of the key lobbying firms that the MPAA used to promote SOPA.

However, lots of folks are pointing to the fact that CCI has also set up an advisory board with
some familiar names of folks who have fought for consumer rights repeatedly. As Greg Sandoval reports at News.com:

CCI's advisory board will include a large number of privacy and technology advocates, including Jerry Berman, chairman of the Internet Education Foundation and founder of the Center for Democracy and Technology; Marsali Hancock, president of iKeepSafe.org; Jules Polenetsky, director of the Future of Privacy Forum; and Gigi Sohn, president and CEO of Public Knowledge.

This is, at the very least, a nod to the fact that the entertainment industry can't just completely control how this system works. Of course, it's an open question how much power this advisory board will actually have, and how much of this is really window dressing. In fact, the actual power to run CCI is in the hands of a separate "board of directors" which is entirely made up of entertainment industry and ISP representatives.

The "good news" is that many of the folks on the advisory board are certainly not at all shy about making their voices heard if they feel they're being ignored, and Public Knowledge's Gigi Sohn is not one to go away quietly on these issues. As she told Sandoval:

"It was not an easy decision for me to join this Advisory Board," Sohn said in a statement. "I did so because I saw the need to be an advocate for the rights of Internet users and to provide transparency."

Sohn said that one of the first things she wants to see once CCI is up and running is to abolish any kind of service suspension.

"I will ask at the appropriate time," Sohn said, "for the ISPs to promise not to interpret the agreement's 'temporary restriction' provision as allowing for suspension of user Internet accounts."

This whole thing will be worth watching closely, and I'm glad that at least a few good people are on the advisory board, but we'll see what happens when the actual "strikes" start issuing.